OTT LAW

Derrick Downing v. Western Auto

Decision date: January 9, 20064 pages

Summary

The Labor and Industrial Relations Commission affirmed the Administrative Law Judge's award denying compensation to Derrick Downing for injuries sustained when a tire blew up in his hands on January 24, 1986. Although the injury was found to be compensable and arose out of employment, the case was settled and no compensation was awarded.

Caption

FINAL AWARD DENYING COMPENSATION

(Affirming Award and Decision of Administrative Law Judge)

Injury No.: 86-002115

Employee: Derrick Downing

Employer: Western Auto (Settled)

Insurer: Royal Insurance Company of America (Settled)

Additional Party: Treasurer of Missouri as Custodian of Second Injury Fund

Date of Accident: Alleged January 24, 1986

Place and County of Accident: Alleged St. Louis, Missouri

The above-entitled workers' compensation case is submitted to the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (Commission) for review as provided by section 287.480 RSMo. Having reviewed the evidence and considered the whole record, the Commission finds that the award of the administrative law judge is supported by competent and substantial evidence and was made in accordance with the Missouri Workers' Compensation Act. Pursuant to section 286.090 RSMo, the Commission affirms the award and decision of the administrative law judge dated August 17, 2005, and awards no compensation in the above-captioned case.

The award and decision of Administrative Law Judge Cornelius T. Lane, issued August 17, 2005, is attached and incorporated by this reference.

Given at Jefferson City, State of Missouri, this 9th day of January 2006.

LABOR AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION

William F. Ringer, Chairman

Alice A. Bartlett, Member

John J. Hickey, Member

Attest:

Secretary

AWARD

Dependents:N/ABefore the
Division of Workers’
Employer:Western Auto (Settled)Compensation
Department of Labor and Industrial
Additional Party: Second Injury FundRelations of Missouri
Jefferson City, Missouri
Insurer:Royal Insurance Company of America (Settled)
Hearing Date:August 8, 2005Checked by: CTL:tr

FINDINGS OF FACT AND RULINGS OF LAW

  1. Are any benefits awarded herein? No
  2. Was the injury or occupational disease compensable under Chapter 287? Yes
  3. Was there an accident or incident of occupational disease under the Law? Yes
  4. Date of accident or onset of occupational disease: January 24, 1986
  5. State location where accident occurred or occupational disease was contracted: St. Louis, Missouri
  6. Was above employee in employ of above employer at time of alleged accident or occupational disease? Yes
  7. Did employer receive proper notice? Yes
  8. Did accident or occupational disease arise out of and in the course of the employment? Yes
  9. Was claim for compensation filed within time required by Law? Yes
  10. Was employer insured by above insurer? Yes
  11. Describe work employee was doing and how accident occurred or occupational disease contracted: Tire blew up in Claimant’s hands.
  12. Did accident or occupational disease cause death? No Date of death? N/A
  13. Part(s) of body injured by accident or occupational disease: Head, face, teeth, right hand and arm, left hand and arm, neck, back, body as a whole
  14. Nature and extent of any permanent disability: $\ 40,000.00 lump sum payment
  15. Compensation paid to-date for temporary disability: N/A
  16. Value necessary medical aid paid to date by employer/insurer? N/A

Employee: Derrick Downing Injury No.: 86-002115 17. Value necessary medical aid not furnished by employer/insurer? N/A 18. Employee's average weekly wages: N/A 19. Weekly compensation rate: N/A 20. Method wages computation: N/A

COMPENSATION PAYABLE

  1. Amount of compensation payable: (Settled)
  2. Second Injury Fund liability: No
  1. Future requirements awarded: None

Said payments to begin N/A and to be payable and be subject to modification and review as provided by law.

The compensation awarded to the claimant shall be subject to a lien in the amount of N/A of all payments hereunder in favor of the following attorney for necessary legal services rendered to the claimant:

$\mathrm{N} / \mathrm{A}$

FINDINGS OF FACT and RULINGS OF LAW:

Employee:Derrick DowningInjury No.: 86-002115
Dependents:N/ABefore the
Division of Workers'
Employer:Western Auto (Settled)Compensation
Department of Labor and Industrial
Additional Party:Second Injury FundRelations of Missouri
Jefferson City, Missouri
Insurer:Royal Insurance Company of America (Settled)Checked by: CTL:tr

PREFACE

A hearing was held on the above-mentioned matter on August 8, 2005. The Claimant was pro-se and the Second Injury Fund was represented by Assistant Attorney General Da-Niel Cunningham.

ISSUE

  1. Second Injury Fund liability.

EXHIBITS

The Claimant offered, and were accepted into evidence, the following exhibits:

Exhibit A. Claim on Reported Case.

Exhibit B.Second Injury Fund Answer.
Exhibit C.Workers’ Compensation Statute.
Exhibit D.Notice of Mediation.
Exhibit E.Missouri Division of Workers’ Compensation Printout.
Exhibit F.Missouri Division of Workers’ Compensation Printout.
Exhibit G.Stipulation for Compromise Settlement.
Exhibit H.Stipulation for Compromise Settlement (yellow copy).
Exhibit I.Stipulation for Compromise Settlement.
Exhibit J.Claim for Compensation.
Exhibit K.Missouri’s Second Injury Fund Brochure.
Exhibit L.Hearing Minute Sheet.
Exhibit M.Correspondence from Attorney David G. Hughes.
Exhibit N.Motion to Withdraw.
Exhibit O.Correspondence from Attorney David G. Hughes.
Exhibit P.Medical Report of Allen Sclaroff, DDS.
Exhibit Q.Transcript of Compromise Settlement.
Exhibit R.Application for Change of Judge.
Exhibit S.Correspondence from Attorney W.J. Glaser.
Exhibit T.Notice of Hearing.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Based upon the competent and substantial evidence, I find:

  1. The Court took judicial notice of its file.
  2. Claimant filed his Claim for Compensation in Injury Number 86-002115 on February 7, 1986. At that time there was no filing of a claim against the Second Injury Fund.
  3. Claimant’s Claim for Compensation against Employer was settled on January 26, 1988 for the lump sum of $\ 40,000.00. There was no Second Injury Fund claim filed.
  4. Claimant, on May 19, 2005, filed a Second Injury Fund claim in the above-mentioned case. Said claim against the Second Injury Fund showed no previous injuries before the date of the original primary injury of January 24, 1986.

RULINGS OF LAW

  1. Claimant’s Second Injury Fund claim is time barred by $\S 287.430 RSMo.

Date: \qquad$ Made by: Cornelius T. Lane Administrative Law Judge Division of Workers' Compensation A true copy: Attest:

Patricia "Pat" Secrest Director Division of Workers' Compensation

Related Decisions

Current v. Little Hills Health Care, LLC(2011)

July 26, 2011

affirmed

The Commission affirmed the administrative law judge's award allowing workers' compensation benefits to employee Odessa Current for injuries sustained in a February 6, 2004 work-related accident at Little Hills Health Care, LLC. The award combined the employee's primary injury with preexisting disabilities to establish Second Injury Fund liability, though a dissenting opinion argued for permanent total disability benefits rather than the enhanced permanent partial disability awarded.

occupational disease6,164 words

Harrison v. Thyssenkrupp Stahl Company(2011)

July 19, 2011

affirmed

The Missouri Labor and Industrial Relations Commission affirmed the administrative law judge's award of workers' compensation benefits to employee Elmer Leroy Harrison for a work-related injury sustained on February 21, 2007, while pushing a metal cart. The claimant was awarded permanent total disability benefits along with past temporary disability compensation and medical aid costs.

occupational disease5,088 words

Vega-Rivera v. Hyatt Corporation d/b/a Hyatt Regency Crown Center(2011)

July 19, 2011

affirmed

The Commission affirmed the administrative law judge's award of workers' compensation benefits to employee Maribel Vega-Rivera for an occupational disease of both upper extremities caused by repetitive job duties, with awards for temporary total disability, permanent partial disability (12.5% left, 15% right with 10% bilateral load), medical expenses, and disfigurement. The employer's challenge that the employee was not covered under Missouri Workers' Compensation Law was rejected, and all findings regarding employment status, causation, and disability were upheld.

occupational disease10,278 words

Estebo v. Webco, Inc.(2011)

July 13, 2011

affirmed

The Commission affirmed the Administrative Law Judge's decision denying workers' compensation benefits, finding that the employee failed to prove his occupationally-induced asthma was caused by workplace exposure to paint fumes due to lack of objective symptoms. A dissenting opinion argued the employee's expert testimony was more credible and compensation should have been awarded for past medical expenses, future medical care, and permanent partial disability.

occupational disease4,836 words

Boone v. Missouri Department of Corrections(2011)

July 1, 2011

affirmed

The Labor and Industrial Relations Commission affirmed the administrative law judge's January 6, 2011 award allowing workers' compensation benefits to Barbara A. Boone for an occupational disease that arose out of her employment with the Missouri Department of Corrections on August 7, 2007. The Commission modified the decision only to clarify jurisdictional authority regarding future disputes related to medical aid.

occupational disease3,862 words